Review and Measurements of Parasound Zdac v.2 DAC and Amp

[έχω δίκιο]

I think they are a step above Emotiva. I consider them value high-end if there is such a thing. Bryston is there too.

And, yet, the Emotiva Stealth DC-1 DAC that you tested, though similar in price to this Parasound, completely crushed the Parasound in performance.

 

[amirm]

And, yet, the Emotiva Stealth DC-1 DAC that you tested, though similar in price to this Parasound, completely crushed the Parasound in performance.

Which was my point: that Parasound brand recognition is higher than what this DAC does.

 

[έχω δίκιο]

Which was my point: that Parasound brand recognition is higher than what this DAC does.

And my point is that I think it's wrong to rank Parasound "a step above Emotiva." Parasound has a long history of "sounds good" engineering rather than embracing objective testing the way that Emotiva does. I own products by both, so I don't have a horse in this race, or, more accurately, I have both horses in this two horse race.

 

[Maxprocrj]

Seriously are you people judge a music gear on the basis on some graphs. OK no problem in doing all that. But pity on your process of judgement an electronics on the basis of graphs and measurements only. I believe on A BODY PART Called EAR

 

[Deleted member 3718]

Seriously are you people judge a music gear on the basis on some graphs. OK no problem in doing all that. But pity on your process of judgement an electronics on the basis of graphs and measurements only. I believe on A BODY PART Called EAR

Do you own this DAC? Despite the measurements I'm curious how it sounds

 

[NTomokawa]

Seriously are you people judge a music gear on the basis on some graphs. OK no problem in doing all that. But pity on your process of judgement an electronics on the basis of graphs and measurements only. I believe on A BODY PART Called EAR

This is Audio Science Review. We value objectiveness over perception.

 

[amirm]

Seriously are you people judge a music gear on the basis on some graphs. OK no problem in doing all that. But pity on your process of judgement an electronics on the basis of graphs and measurements only. I believe on A BODY PART Called EAR

It is trivial to show that your ear (plus brain) lie to you and lie good. But if you like to live in the Matrix, who are we to argue. You have to choose to take the blue or red bill:

We have taken the red....

 

[NTomokawa]

But if you like to live in the Matrix, who are we to argue.

I know this cable doesn't exist. I know that when I plug it into my amp, the Matrix is telling my brain that it sounds warm and transparent. After nine years, you know what I realize? Audiophoolery is bliss.

 

[SIY]

Ears don’t lie. Brains do constantly. Peeking allows your brain to lie to you most easily. So good measurements are crucial to characterizing audio reproduction electronics.

 

[Blumlein 88]

It is trivial to show that your ear (plus brain) lie to you and lie good. But if you like to live in the Matrix, who are we to argue. You have to choose to take the blue or red bill:

We have taken the red....

Good name for a new audio company.

Red Pilled Audio

I can even imagine an ad for it.

You've been thru the Twilight Zone, which is a dimension as vast as space and as timeless as infinity. It is the middle ground between light and shadow, between science and superstition, and it lies between the pit of man's fears and the summit of his knowledge. This is the dimension of imagination.

But only if you are ready, then we have the answer to finding your way back to reality. You need the Red Pill. We at Red Pilled audio specialize in Reality, not superstitious imagination.

 

[fenomeno]

Just out of curiousity, and I know this is an old post, but has there been any discussion about this DAC's measured performance related to the design as it implements a volume control for the outputs where as the first version of the ZDAC does NOT implement a volume control. Inside layout of the units are somewhat different and I believe, as a result, the power supply distribution, filtering, etc. is not exactly the same for both units. Most reviews praising the ZDAC are actually of the first unit, not the V2. So I wonder if the changes made to the unit were actually negatively impacting the design. I understand there is a lockout feature of the volume to eliminate it, in theory, from the circuit. Were the measurements taken with the switch in lockout position? Was a V1 unit offered for review to compare? Just curious...not a tech guy, obviously, but actually interested as I had a paramount HCA 800mk2 amp for decades and had the volume controls taken out of the circuit, the improvement was dramatic to the sound. Obviously the amount of current/voltage running through those cheap carbon pots is not the same scenario as the ZDAC, but it never escaped me that an inexpensive attenuation solution is usually a bad idea. I would imagine the digital circuits are super sensitive to the surrounding electronics and when circuits change, the result could be measurable if not audible. The ZDAC has a certain ease and natural timbre to instruments (if not slightly thin and a little sloppy in the lower treble region when reproducing certain transients or musical complexity) that I thought was very accurate to the instruments they reproduced (trumpet, piano, upright bass). It does soundstaging well...but it makes me wonder how well similarly priced newer designs with better measurements actually perform and sound. Is a Schitt Modi or Topping DX7s or similar an eye opening experience? Is the idea of timbre and tone the last vestiges of an aging "audiophile guy" seeking the digital holy grail for 400 bucks?